Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Pop the mysterious child

surrealitycheckthe search for the means to put an end to thingsan end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered Userregular

In Sweden, a couple have decided to keep their child's sex a secret from the public. The child, named Pop, has a wardrobe full of clothes for both sexes, and is allowed to pick whatever they want every morning. Casual inquiries from strangers are met with the statement that the parents do not wish to give out that information.

In other words, they're doing quite an interesting thing with the child's gender. The full text of the article from a swedish newspaper is lurking in the spoiler.

A couple of Swedish parents have stirred up debate in the country by refusing to reveal whether their two-and-a-half-year-old child is a boy or a girl.

Pop’s parents [see footnote], both 24, made a decision when their baby was born to keep Pop’s sex a secret. Aside from a select few – those who have changed the child’s diaper – nobody knows Pop’s gender; if anyone enquires, Pop’s parents simply say they don’t disclose this information.

In an interview with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet in March, the parents were quoted saying their decision was rooted in the feminist philosophy that gender is a social construction.

“We want Pop to grow up more freely and avoid being forced into a specific gender mould from the outset,” Pop’s mother said. “It's cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead.”

The child's parents said so long as they keep Pop’s gender a secret, he or she will be able to avoid preconceived notions of how people should be treated if male or female.

Pop's wardrobe includes everything from dresses to trousers and Pop's hairstyle changes on a regular basis. And Pop usually decides how Pop is going to dress on a given morning.

Although Pop knows that there are physical differences between a boy and a girl, Pop's parents never use personal pronouns when referring to the child – they just say Pop.

"I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

But while Pop’s parents say they have received supportive feedback from many of their peers, not everyone agrees that their chosen course of action will have a positive outcome.

“Ignoring children's natures simply doesn’t work,” says Susan Pinker, a psychologist and newspaper columnist from Toronto, Canada, who wrote the book The Sexual Paradox, which focuses on sex differences in the workplace.

“Child-rearing should not be about providing an opportunity to prove an ideological point, but about responding to each child’s needs as an individual,” Pinker tells The Local.

“It’s unlikely that they’ll be able to keep this a secret for long. Children are curious about their own identity, and are likely to gravitate towards others of the same sex during free play time in early childhood.”

Pinker says there are many ways that males and females differ from birth; even if gender is kept ‘secret,’ prenatal hormones developed in the second trimester of pregnancy already alter the way the child behaves and feels.

She says once children can speak, males tell aggressive stories 87 per cent of the time, while females only 17 per cent. In a study, children aged two to four were given a task to work together for a reward, and boys used physical tactics 50 times more than girls, she says.

“If the parents are doing this because they want to create a discussion with other adults about why gender is important, then I think they can make a point of it,” Henkel says in a telephone interview with The Local.

“You can talk about there being a non-stereotypical gender; if you are a girl you can do the same as a boy, and if you’re a boy you can do the same as a girl.”

Henkel also says a child's sex can deeply affect how they are treated growing up, and distract them from simply being a human being.

“If the child is dressed up as a girl or boy, it affects them because people see and treat them in a more gender-typical way,” Henkel explains.

“Girls are told they are cute in their dresses, and boys are told they are cool with their car toys. But if you give them no gender they will be seen more as a human or not a stereotype as a boy or girl.”

She says that without these gender stereotypes, children can build character as individuals, not hindered by preconceived notions of what they should be as males or females.

“I think that can make these kids stronger,” Henkel says.

Anna Nordenström, a paediatric endocrinologist at Karolinska Institutet, says it’s hard to know what effects the parents' decision will have on Pop.

“It will affect the child, but it’s hard to say if it will hurt the child,” says Nordenström, who studies hormonal influences on gender development.

“I don’t know what they are trying to achieve. It’s going to make the child different, make them very special.”

She says if Pop is still ‘genderless’ by the time he or she starts school, Pop will certainly receive a lot of attention from classmates.

“We don’t know exactly what determines sexual identity, but it’s not only sexual upbringing,” says Nordenström. “Gender-typical behaviour, sexual preferences and sexual identity usually go together. There are hormonal and other influences that we don’t know that will determine the gender of the child.”

Both Nordenström and Pinker refer to a controversial case from 1967 when a circumcision left one of two twin brothers without a penis. Dr. John Money, who asserted that gender was learned rather than innate, convinced the parents to raise 'David' as 'Brenda' and the child had cosmetic genitalia reconstruction surgery.

She was raised as a female, with girls’ clothes, games and codes of behaviour. The parents never told Brenda the secret until she was a teenager and rebelled against femininity. She then started receiving testosterone injections and underwent another genetic reconstruction process to become David again. David Reimer denounced the experiment as a crushing failure before committing suicide at the age of 38.

“I don’t think that trying to keep a child’s sex a secret will fool anyone, nor do I think it’s wise or ethical,” says Pinker. “As with any family secret, when we try to keep an elemental truth from children, it usually blows up in the parent’s face, via psychosomatic illness or rebellious behaviour.”

But with a second child on the way, Pop's parents have no plans to change what they see as a winning formula. As for Pop, they say they will only reveal the child's sex when Pop thinks it's time.

At first I was confused - surely it would be fairly obvious what sex the child was pretty soon- but the more I thought about it, the more interesting it is. I wonder how much gender stuff happens very early on in a child's life.

What do you chaps think? Good, evil, bizarre? And what do you think will come of it?

Posts

Bizarre, sorry. Gender roles are okay, it's okay for males and females to be different, provided they aren't discriminated on. It's okay for little boys to be little boys, and little girls to be little girls. I hate this sort of forced equality play.

Fucking bizarre. The parents have this idea that this will lead to better personality and higher self-confidence, yet we have no idea where they got that notion from.

What will most likely happen is that a few years down the line, Pop will want to use a public restroom, and everyone will freak out. A BOY GOING INTO A GIRL'S RESTROOM!? WAIT, WHAT IF HE'S A GIRL GOING INTO THE BOY'S RESTROOM!?

I've heard of experiments like this before which generally result in parents who are disappointed but resigned when by age two their child is already clearly latching on to all the same respective gender stereotypes anyway.

Bizarre, sorry. Gender roles are okay, it's okay for males and females to be different, provided they aren't discriminated on. It's okay for little boys to be little boys, and little girls to be little girls. I hate this sort of forced equality play.

I've heard of experiments like this before which generally result in parents who are disappointed but resigned when by age two their child is already clearly latching on to all the same respective gender stereotypes anyway.

Bizarre, sorry. Gender roles are okay, it's okay for males and females to be different, provided they aren't discriminated on. It's okay for little boys to be little boys, and little girls to be little girls. I hate this sort of forced equality play.

Is it not okay for Pop to be whatever he or she wants?

I have a small child, and she doesn't know whether she wants fucking PB&J or a cookie half the time, asking her to make a gender determination is stupid. No child is mentally or emotionally capable of making a life altering decision like that, and they certainly aren't going to do it based on you letting them choose their clothes every morning.

This kind of crap is 100% about the parents, and can't possibly have the true emotional well being of the child at heart.

I too believe gender is a social construct, and would most likely do the same with my children if I ever have any.

I don't know that I will go so far as to "hide" their biological sex, but I am of the mindset that gender roles are in most cases completely prescribed by culture given that as little as a hundred years ago, pink was considered a color for men to wear, and blue was the color for baby girls, and even further back had men wearing the latest "fashions" which included lots and LOTS of lace and makeup. What the previous sentence means is that things like "dresses are for girls" and "boys like trucks" are completely made up by our shared culture, and I think that breaking the chains those have placed on people is the first step toward legitimate gender equality.

And demonstrating that gender roles ARE social constructs that can be avoided goes a long way towards achieving that goal.

This is not to say that legitimately enjoying "gender appropriate" things is bad or wrong, but enjoying them because your gender should enjoy them IS bad and wrong.

If Pop DOES have a penis, and ends up liking trucks then that is cool. If Pop has a vagina and likes tea parties, also cool.

However if Pop has a penis and likes tea parties and dresses? ALSO cool. And in many cases a little boy would NOT be allowed to like these things WITHOUT mockery or even negative responses from his parents.

Please note the obvious gender stereotypes I have made in this post and recognize that they are used to illustrate a point.

I think raising a child in a household which supports non-traditional roles and egalitarian ideas about how genders should be treated is more likely to produce a positive result than some poorly conceived political experiment.

I think raising a child in a household which supports non-traditional roles and egalitarian ideas about how genders should be treated is more likely to produce a positive result than some poorly conceived political experiment.

But that doesn't get you on the news, so...

I have zero issue with this. My little girl is constantly told "Play with the toys you want, enjoy the things you want". If she wants to play with GI Joe, I am totally okay with this. But this story is a political stunt, nothing more.

I too believe gender is a social construct, and would most likely do the same with my children if I ever have any.

I don't know that I will go so far as to "hide" their biological sex, but I am of the mindset that gender roles are in most cases completely prescribed by culture given that as little as a hundred years ago, pink was considered a color for men to wear, and blue was the color for baby girls, and even further back had men wearing the latest "fashions" which included lots and LOTS of lace and makeup. What the previous sentence means is that things like "dresses are for girls" and "boys like trucks" are completely made up by our shared culture, and I think that breaking the chains those have placed on people is the first step toward legitimate gender equality.

And demonstrating that gender roles ARE social constructs that can be avoided goes a long way towards achieving that goal.

This is not to say that legitimately enjoying "gender appropriate" things is bad or wrong, but enjoying them because your gender should enjoy them IS bad and wrong.

If Pop DOES have a penis, and ends up liking trucks then that is cool. If Pop has a vagina and likes tea parties, also cool.

However if Pop has a penis and likes tea parties and dresses? ALSO cool. And in many cases a little boy would NOT be allowed to like these things WITHOUT mockery or even negative responses from his parents.

Please note the obvious gender stereotypes I have made in this post and recognize that they are used to illustrate a point.

None of that really matters since these kids aren't old enough to make a decision as complex as their gender, and probably won't be for quite a while.

I've heard of experiments like this before which generally result in parents who are disappointed but resigned when by age two their child is already clearly latching on to all the same respective gender stereotypes anyway.

I've never heard of an experiment like this before.

Most such "experiments" involve the imposition of a particular role. This is the exact opposite - it's the nonimposition of any gender role.

Bizarre, sorry. Gender roles are okay, it's okay for males and females to be different, provided they aren't discriminated on. It's okay for little boys to be little boys, and little girls to be little girls. I hate this sort of forced equality play.

Again, they're not "forcing" anything on their child. They're refusing to force a gender role on their child. Not the same thing at all.

I think it's height of silly goosery to use your kid as a prop in some kind of political statement

The "political statement" here is "imposing gender roles are harmful." If they believe that imposing gender roles is harmful, then it logically follows that they wouldn't want to allow that harm to come to their children. You're basically saying that only hypocrites can be parents.

This is exactly why I think it's wrong. We have no idea how this will affect the child, at all, because it is completely unprecedented. What if he/she ends up horribly confused and becomes depressed/suicidal? That's just one horrible possibility out of many.

Also, who is to say that Pop will not be mocked by his/her peers for being genderless?

After looking up the dictionary definition of 'gender', I will concede this...but I think for a lot of people the words are interchangeable (right or wrong).

The word gender used to be a lot more useful when people thought of it as either being grammar or sociology.

On my part, I don't think this will do any particular harm to the child. By the time he's 4-6 it'll be relatively obvious if he's male or female.

What the previous sentence means is that things like "dresses are for girls" and "boys like trucks" are completely made up by our shared culture

IMO it doesn't even matter if those statements are true - in the scientific sense(I have seen evidence that male baby macaque monkeys prefer to play with trucks over dolls to a greater degree than female baby macaque monkeys); the fact that 2% of the variation in what toy you like come from your sex doesn't outweigh the 98% of effect from everything else, which is what we should be focusing on. Tiny percentage tendencies are an irrelevance.

I too believe gender is a social construct, and would most likely do the same with my children if I ever have any.

I don't know that I will go so far as to "hide" their biological sex, but I am of the mindset that gender roles are in most cases completely prescribed by culture given that as little as a hundred years ago, pink was considered a color for men to wear, and blue was the color for baby girls, and even further back had men wearing the latest "fashions" which included lots and LOTS of lace and makeup. What the previous sentence means is that things like "dresses are for girls" and "boys like trucks" are completely made up by our shared culture, and I think that breaking the chains those have placed on people is the first step toward legitimate gender equality.

And demonstrating that gender roles ARE social constructs that can be avoided goes a long way towards achieving that goal.

This is not to say that legitimately enjoying "gender appropriate" things is bad or wrong, but enjoying them because your gender should enjoy them IS bad and wrong.

If Pop DOES have a penis, and ends up liking trucks then that is cool. If Pop has a vagina and likes tea parties, also cool.

However if Pop has a penis and likes tea parties and dresses? ALSO cool. And in many cases a little boy would NOT be allowed to like these things WITHOUT mockery or even negative responses from his parents.

Please note the obvious gender stereotypes I have made in this post and recognize that they are used to illustrate a point.

None of that really matters since these kids aren't old enough to make a decision as complex as their gender, and probably won't be for quite a while.

This is exactly why I think it's wrong. We have no idea how this will affect the child, at all, because it is completely unprecedented. What if he/she ends up horribly confused and becomes depressed/suicidal? That's just one horrible possibility out of many.

Also, who is to say that Pop will not be mocked by his/her peers for being genderless?

The parents are effectively using their kid as a guinea pig.

I think these are valid concerns.

I think that this has a much better shot of working in Sweden than it would in the US.

I have a small child, and she doesn't know whether she wants fucking PB&J or a cookie half the time, asking her to make a gender determination is stupid. No child is mentally or emotionally capable of making a life altering decision like that, and they certainly aren't going to do it based on you letting them choose their clothes every morning.

Is it a crucial life-altering decision if he or she can always change his or her mind the next day?

MrMister on June 2010

0

FeralThat's what I do. I drink, and I know things.Registered Userregular

This is exactly why I think it's wrong. We have no idea how this will affect the child, at all, because it is completely unprecedented. What if he/she ends up horribly confused and becomes depressed/suicidal? That's just one horrible possibility out of many.

Also, who is to say that Pop will not be mocked by his/her peers for being genderless?

The parents are effectively using their kid as a guinea pig.

There are also many GOOD possibilities to come out of this

Not to say those concerns are invalid, but they also blind themselves to the potential benefits of this.

I think it's height of silly goosery to use your kid as a prop in some kind of political statement

The "political statement" here is "imposing gender roles are harmful." If they believe that imposing gender roles is harmful, then it logically follows that they wouldn't want to allow that harm to come to their children. You're basically saying that only hypocrites can be parents.

But it seems to me that all the parents are doing is just preventing the child from exploring a part of their identity entirely.

How are they preventing the child from exploring? If anything I would almost lean toward them giving the child too much leeway at this stage in it's life. Though I don't really know that there's such a thing in this specific case, and the kid probably doesn't know what's going on anyway. Just that he/she gets to pick whether or not they want to wear the blue onsie today or the pink one.

Like I said, the fiancee and I have had a LONG discussion about this- if we ever have kids we will be buying the most gender-neutral things we can until our child is old enough to decide for themselves what they want to play with.

And at no point will "but that is for boys/girls, why don't you do/use X instead" be said.